If the political press wants to referee the 2026 midterms, fine. Voters should demand something in return: one rulebook for everybody — conservative, progressive, socialist, MAGA, moderate, and extremist.
Use the labels if they fit, but make candidates on both sides pass the same test.
A media critique published by Tim Graham at Newsbusters laid out the problem in unusually useful terms.
With about three months remaining in the midterm campaign, it’s become time for the most desperate partisan gamesmanship, as our socialist-friendly media engage in helping the Democrats win.
Do not recognize the “independent media” and the “independent fact-checkers” as the referees of this campaign. These elitists should be identified as uniformed players for the Democrat team, since the following are their apparent rules of campaign communication:
1. Republicans can’t call Democrats “communists.” This applies even if you make campaign appearances with someone like Hasan Piker, who thinks mass-murdering communist Mao Zedong is “one of the great leaders of this world." It applies even if you’re talking about New York's Darializa Chevalier, who published tweets about how great The Communist Manifesto is. That apparently proves nothing.
2. But Democrats can call Republicans fascists and Nazis. CNN and MS NOW seem like they’re on an endless loop of comparing Trump to Adolf Hitler amassing his tyrannical powers in the 1930s. Try looking for an article where PolitiFact throws a flag at a liberal calling a conservative a fascist or a Nazi. It doesn’t exist.
3. Republicans can’t call Democrats Islamists, jihadists, or pro-terrorist. Again, who are you if you campaign with Hasan Piker, who stated “America deserved 9/11”? Piker has hailed the mass-murdering terrorists of Hamas as "a thousand times better than the fascist settler colonial apartheid state" of Israel? The entire DSA contingent of candidates has a platform supporting "Palestinian resistance" while rejecting calls to condemn Hamas, framing the October 7, 2023 slaughter of innocents as an “inevitable” response to Israeli occupation.
4. But Democrats can accuse Republicans of Christian nationalist theocracy. Abdul el-Sayed can make speeches at a 2022 CAIR event comparing conservatives in Oklahoma preemptively banning Sharia law to the 19th century murder of Indians, the Tulsa Massacre of 1921, and even the Oklahoma City Bombing of 1995. That, to our media elites, is considered fair commentary. PolitiFact used that fact-mangling to defend el-Sayed as reasonable.
But when Oklahoma’s Superintendent of Public Instruction suggested putting the Bible in the classroom in 2024, CNN anchor Pamela Brown pushed back with a cartoonish brushback pitch: “Are you okay with all teachings of the Bible? If you want to bring it back into the classroom: rape, incest, beheading. Are you — Is that acceptable to you?”
Republicans are scolded for calling Democrats communists, Islamists, or extremists, while Democrats receive far more room to describe Republicans as fascists, Nazis, Christian nationalists, or MAGA extremists.
The individual examples can be debated, but the standard behind them shouldn't be.
Wisconsin handed us a perfect first case. Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, the Democratic nominee for governor, is regularly described as a "moderate." Wisconsin state Rep. Francesca Hong, whom he narrowly defeated, is identified as a Democratic Socialist. Republican Rep. Tom Tiffany, Crowley's November opponent, is tied closely to President Donald Trump.
From the Associated Press:
David Crowley’s razor-thin primary win over a democratic socialist sets up a Wisconsin governor’s race against a Republican congressman who has voted with President Donald Trump 100% of the time, potentially giving moderate Democrats an ideal matchup as Trump’s approval ratings sag in the swing state.
Crowley overcame Francesca Hong in dramatic fashion in Tuesday’s primary, stunning pundits and pollsters who had long placed Hong as the front-runner. That means Crowley’s challenger, U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, must pivot to face a Democrat known for working across the aisle with Republicans as the county executive in Milwaukee, the state’s largest source of Democratic voters.
Crowley has already called Tiffany a "MAGA extremist."
Nothing requires us to reject those descriptions automatically. Hong is a Democratic Socialist; Crowley worked with Wisconsin Republicans on a major Milwaukee funding deal, while Tiffany strongly supports Trump.
The trouble begins when some labels are treated as neutral descriptions while others carry an implied warning label.
So apply what I call the mirror rule. If Tiffany called Crowley a "socialist extremist," would the phrase simply pass through the campaign coverage? Or would readers soon receive an explanation of why the accusation lacked context, overstated Crowley's record, or unfairly connected him to Hong?
Now reverse it again. If a Republican called a Democrat a fascist, would the political press show the same restraint it displays when "MAGA extremist" enters the conversation?
Minnesota offers another test. Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan, now the Democrat Senate nominee, is described as "progressive." Rep. Angie Craig was the more "moderate" candidate in their primary. Flanagan has called for ICE to be dismantled, while Craig voted for the Laken Riley Act before later regretting her vote.
From Reuters:
Moderate David Crowley beat Democratic socialist Francesca Hong in a tight race for Wisconsin's Democratic gubernatorial primary election, a closely watched vote seen as a key test for the appeal of progressive candidates in the battleground state.
According to projections from U.S. media including the Associated Press and NBC News, Milwaukee County Executive Crowley was chosen by Wisconsin Democrats over Hong, who sought to become the state's first democratic socialist governor.
. . .
Minnesota's Democratic Senate primary indicated there is still momentum behind left-leaning candidates, with progressive Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan, who was elected on a ticket with Governor Tim Walz in 2018, beating more moderate Representative Angie Craig.
The candidates are seeking the seat left open by Senator Tina Smith, a Minnesota Democrat who announced her retirement in February 2025.
Craig was the only Minnesota Democrat to vote for the Laken Riley Act, which gave the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency broader authority to detain immigrants charged with some crimes, but later said she regretted her vote.
Flanagan has said ICE is out of control and must be dismantled.
Progressive may accurately place Flanagan within her party, but notice how comfortable the word feels. Meanwhile, "far right," "hard right," "extreme," and "Trump-aligned" often tell readers how they should view a Republican before the policy discussions begin.
Here's a better rule: remove the adjective and describe the position.
Tell voters Flanagan wants ICE dismantled; tell them Hong supported abolishing ICE, higher taxes on billionaires and corporations, and a one-year data-center moratorium.
Tell them how Tiffany votes, what he proposes, and where he agrees with Trump.
Then let voters decide who's extreme.
Political coverage becomes most influential when judgment hides inside ordinary words. "Moderate" reassures. "Extremist" condemns. "Progressive" softens policies that might sound considerably less gentle when plainly described.
The first rule of my Referee Test is simple: same evidence, same definition, same skepticism, and the same burden of proof.
Nobody is asking political reporters to become conservatives; we're asking them to use the same whistle for both teams.
We're full-blown in the middle of election season, and let's keep score.
If you value conservative journalism that checks the referees instead of accepting every call, join PJ Media VIP. Use promo code FIGHT and get 60% off your membership today.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member